Benbrika and others to face more terror charges

By Karen Kissane and Peter Gregory

CONVICTED terrorist leader Abdul Nacer Benbrika and four of his followers are alleged to have committed other terror offences that will be tried separately starting next year.

Benbrika, Aimen Joud, Fadl Sayadi and Ahmed Raad are charged with having planned or prepared for a terrorist act by placing an order with a company called Haines Educational for laboratory equipment - beakers and arm brackets - to be used in the making of an explosive.

Separately, Aimen Joud and Shane Kent are charged with two other counts. They are alleged to have intentionally provided support to the terrorist organisation al-Qaeda in a way that would directly or indirectly foster the carrying out of a terrorist act.

They are also charged with making a document connected with preparation for a terrorist act and knowing of that connection.

These charges relate to alleged work they contributed to an international internet video.

Advertisement

The other charges can be revealed now that the jury has delivered its final verdicts in the first trial, of Benbrika and 11 of his alleged associates.

Yesterday a Supreme Court jury found Amer Haddara, 28, of Yarraville, guilty of being a member but not guilty of being in possession of a computer connected with a terrorist act.

The jury could not reach a verdict on whether Shane Kent, 31, of Meadow Heights, had been a member.

Just minutes before it was announced that the verdicts were ready, Justice Bernard Bongiorno refused an application to discharge the jury, which had been deliberating for 23 days after a seven-month trial.

The lawyer for Shane Kent, John O'Sullivan, argued that the jury might have been influenced by comments made yesterday by federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland welcoming the guilty verdicts delivered on Monday over Benbrika and five others. It is normally risking contempt of court to comment on a case before a jury has finished. Justice Bongiorno agreed with lawyer Antony Trood, for Amer Haddara, that the comments should not have been made.

The Attorney-General's office did respond to Age requests for comment.

Outside court, a solicitor for five of the accused, Robert Stary, said the comments "beggared belief".

Mr Stary said Mr McClelland needed to claim the prosecution was successful, "as does the AFP and the intelligence community because we have spent $20 billion in this country in pursuing cases against inconsequential figures. When these men were arrested, they said that an imminent terrorist attack had been thwarted. Well, unfortunately, they could not identify any imminent terrorist attack by these 12 men."

Mr Stary said the Senate was recalled to change a word in the terrorism legislation the same week that the WorkChoices legislation was passed: "These are political prosecutions; they've been shown to be political prosecutions. And history, unfortunately, will indict the Howard, Ruddock and Downer regime, together with the failure by the current government to act adequately in reviewing these counter-terrorism laws."

Greg Barns, lawyer for Ezzit Raad, yesterday said his client was disappointed and was considering an appeal.

He also criticised the legislation on which the men's charges were based. "The anti-terror laws as currently drafted are breathtakingly wide in their scope and will inevitably result in guilt by association."

Loading

The mufti of Australia, Sheikh Fehmi Naji El-Imam, issued a statement saying the Muslim community was relieved that the trial was over and was confident that the accused had the opportunity to protest their innocence.

"The reaction from the Muslim community to the verdicts is one of mixed emotions, as many people know of these men and empathise with the hardship that their families have endured to date and will continue to endure beyond today," he said.